Peter F. at Wizbang Sports has the low down on the series, which the Sox easily won 4-0. But I have a question: what does it say about the difference between the two leagues when the Rockies, who dominated the National League with such ease, especially in the post season, were absolutely trounced in the World Series by an American League team?

The level of play in the National League is a joke. I think the Rockies were swept due to their lack of experience in The Playoffs, but it is very hard for a National League team to beat an American League team.

The Cubs have one of the highest payrolls in Baseball, as do other National League teams. It makes a small difference. The National League is completely long-ball focused, and less capable of winning on the fundamentals. Also -- end the National League practice of having the Pitchet bat. The action comes to a screeching halt whenever the Pitcher steps up to the plate!

what does it say about the difference between the two leagues when the Rockies, who dominated the National League with such ease, especially in the post season, were absolutely trounced in the World Series by an American League team?

What does it say about the difference between the two leagues when the Rockies... were absolutely trounced in the World Series by an American League team?

What did it say about the American League last year when the St. Louis Cardinals, who barely managed to even make the playoffs (with a record of only 83 wins and 78 losses, 2nd worst record ever for a league champion), managed to beat the Detroit Tigers, who had already defeated the Yankees in that post-season, in five games? Nothing. All this World Series says is that the Boston Red Sox were better than the Colorado Rockies, at least for the four games they played in the World Series.

The Red Sox were pretty much the best team in the game from bell-to-bell this year. So it's really no wonder that they won.

The Rockies were a middle-of-the-road team all year that went on one heck of a hot streak to end the year, and through the first 7 games of the playoffs, then they had 8 days off, so it's no wonder that they lost.

Remember that the Cardinals handled Detroit last year in the WS. What does that say about last years level of play in each league?

But I have a question: what does it say about the difference between the two leagues when the Rockies, who dominated the National League with such ease, especially in the post season, were absolutely trounced in the World Series by an American League team?

I'll take a stab at answering.

First, there's a bit of a perception/reality problem when it comes to the AL's apparent dominance over the NL--at least recently speaking. Since 2000, the AL has a 5-3 edge in Series victories over the NL--not really dominant. Over the last 50 years, the AL has a 27-23 edge in WS victories--right in line with the past 8 years. However, since baseball switched over to 2 leagues eons ago, the AL holds a 60-41 advantage.

I think one reason has to do with a majority of MLB's oldest teams with the deepest pockets and ties to their communities sitting in major media markets. New York, Boston, Baltimore, Detroit, Cleveland, Chicago (White Sox) and Philadelphia (when they were still the Philly A's and in the AL), all have this one thread in common. The money is there, players want to play where the money is (and always have) and where they can win. You can even throw Toronto into the mix as one of the more recent and successful teams (back-to-back WS wins in the early '90s) with deep pockets in a major media market.

These teams can outbid NL teams for the services of the most talented players, and routinely do so. That hardly means the NL is bereft of talent, that's certainly not the case with the likes of Ryan Howard, Chase Utley, Lance Berkman, Alfonso Soriano, Carlos Beltran, Jake Peavy, Matt Holliday and so on in the NL. Question is, how long will some of them stay in NL given the money in the AL? Who knows.

So why are AL teams beating NL teams? When it comes right down to it, and apart from all I just said, it has to do with this simple, well-known baseball fact:

So basically the AL owns the NL. And the cry is to eliminate the DH? Heck no, clearly better teams are being produced in the AL - add the DH to the NL and see what happens when pitchers have to work 27 outs per game instead of 24 (yes, occasionally pitchers get a hit, good for them). How many rallies are killed when you've got 2 outs, 2 on, a tiring pitcher and then, ahhh...sweet relief, the opposing pitcher's up, quick strikeout, inning over. How often do you have to pull a good pitcher still pitching OK in a close game because you need to get a guy that can bat in? The AL is simply demanding better pitching now than the NL, plus you've got the fact that the AL has, in many cases, a powerhouse slugger batting cleanup, a guy that probably can't even play in the field except as needed, but the pitcher has to face this monster 3-4 times per game. So, yeah, get rid of the DH if you want the AL to revert to the NL's level instead of bringing up the NL to the AL.

Then again, sometimes it's just the way things work out - for instance, there are no differences in the rules in the NFL's AFC and NFC, but the AFC is dominant now (the NFC used to be) - eventually all those higher draft picks start to pay off for the worse league. Also, since the Braves started to tank there's no one in the NL that forces other teams to really push themselves like the Yankees have pretty much always done, and now Boston does. Look at the Angels and White Sox and Toronto courting free agents, etc trying to catch BOS and NYY.

Nah, the DH isn't the problem--at least not in the World Series. The Rockies got an extra bat in the lineup in Boston just like Boston; and the Red Sox had to have their pitchers hit in CO just like CO. It's really a non-issue in the Series.

The Rockies are a young team built from within. They were just a bunch of kids with a lot of confidence until they had to play the Red Sox. Boston was the better team. But we're proud of what the Rockies accomplished this year. Their success has got people here excited about baseball again and no one can take that away from the city.

I'm just upset because I had seats behind home plate (row 28) for tonight's game. Oh well.

All they need is a little more pitching and they'll be contenders for a long time, seriously. Francis and Jiminez are aces, but the 3-5 spots in the rotation are dubious at best. (Cook's OK, but Fogg is awful.)

Fuentes, the reliever, killed us too. He gave up the home run on his first pitch last night, the 4th run in a 4-3 victory for Boston. But you're right about the pitching. Corpas, the closer, is amazing!

Yep... with the exception of game one (pitched brilliantly by the best picther in baseball today - Josh Beckett) all games were relatively close. The difference is that the Rock's pitching staff made more mistakes. Congrats to the Red Sox (yes, they were the best team, wire-to-wire this year), and to the Rocks for finally bringing competitive baseball back to Colorado. As Cubbies fans say, there is always next year.